DSLRUsers.com

Sorry i know this may start a war, but i have to ask.

Canon 450d / Nikon D90?

I am just looking at buying a DSLR as i am off to South Africa in April for my Honeymoon and want to get a Camera that i can take some good shots with.

I have mainly looked at the D90 on the Basis that it is at the top of my price range and appears to be of a high level of DSLR ( i know i have it in my head the more you spend the better - prob not always the case). And i have spoken to a few people that have recomended Nikon.

I will be looking at places to purchase that offer interest free terms, all i have found thus far are the Goods Guys and Harvey Norman, does anyone know of any other stores?...... (i know by doing this it will cost a bit more)

Look forward to advice.

Cheers
Luke

Lukec wrote:Sorry i know this may start a war, but i have to ask.

Canon 450d / Nikon D90?

No. That won't start a war.

I am just looking at buying a DSLR as i am off to South Africa in April for my Honeymoon

But that may be more likely to.

First of all, it's not the camera, but you.

I have mainly looked at the D90 on the Basis that it is at the top of my price range and appears to be of a high level of DSLR ( i know i have it in my head the more you spend the better - prob not always the case). And i have spoken to a few people that have recomended Nikon.

Have you had a good play with either of these cameras? Which feels better in your hands? Which seems (to you) to be easier to operate? Feels more comfy? Feels like it's a part of your hands?

Nikon are good; they're my choice, but Canon, too, are good. Either brand will satisfy your needs, and either brand will help you turn in great images.

I will be looking at places to purchase that offer interest free terms, all i have found thus far are the Goods Guys and Harvey Norman, does anyone know of any other stores?...... (i know by doing this it will cost a bit more)

JB?

Please read the FAQ and update your profile. We can only give you meaningful information when you comply with the rules. As we have no idea of where you are located, we may as well tell you to go shopping on Nathan Road or Wilshire Blvd ... Or perhaps Trafalgar Square.

Welcome Luke!

Lukec wrote:I will be looking at places to purchase that offer interest free terms, all i have found thus far are the Goods Guys and Harvey Norman, does anyone know of any other stores?...... (i know by doing this it will cost a bit more)

I'm surprised Gary didn't bring this up, but you don't have a meaningful location in your profile*. This means we don't know where you are (I assume you are in Australia somewhere as you mention Good Guys and Harvey Norman) but if we knew where you lived we could probably recommend a specific store close to home.

Anyway, as Gary says, both Nikon and Canon are good, and you can't really go wrong. I have Nikon and like the way the cameras feel and the controls are easy. You are better off choosing a brand that works for you as you'll need to get to know it so you can make the most out of it. Again as Gary says, you are the one taking the photographs, not the camera, it is just a tool. However, as a tool, it has to work for you hence the value of playing with them in the store.

* OK, he edited his post while I was typing mine.

Both are good..... my main comment is that the lenses are where the expense can really be, the body is like a computer, consumable and not worth much after 3-4 years in reality.

Gary's comments are all very good. As you are going overseas, if you were to wait until <1 month before leaving Aus, you could consider using the tourist refund scheme to claim a GST refund off your purchase if you fit their criteria. Just bear in mind, you have a $ limit that you and your better half can bring back into Aus.....

Whether you buy the body early and learn it and use the TRS to claim back the GST on a nice shiny new lens or not.

Have a look at the following for some prices - http://www.cameras.net.au & http://www.d-d-photographics.com.au

Hi

Sorry, i think i have updated my location.

Sydney NSW.

Lukec wrote:Hi

Sorry, i think i have updated my location.

Sydney NSW.

Sigh ... could somebody please help me find my happy pills ??? Some days seem to be better than others ...

Let me please refer you to the section of the FAQ that carries the heading MEANINGFUL Location. You may then find this section to be helpful too.

gstark wrote:

Lukec wrote:Hi

Sorry, i think i have updated my location.

Sydney NSW.

Sigh ... could somebody please help me find my happy pills ??? Some days seem to be better than others ...

Let me please refer you to the section of the FAQ that carries the heading MEANINGFUL Location. You may then find this section to be helpful too.

Just out of curiosity, and I hope I ask this respectfully and appreciate that it is your forum and your rules apply, but what is the big deal about the meaningful location? I understand an idea of city would be helpful, but why specifically a suburb. Some people may be concerned with privacy of information and feel a little "exposed" putting up their suburb.

I guess if the reason for narrowing it down rather than a city may help new people fill it in correctly the first time.

georgie wrote:

gstark wrote:

Lukec wrote:Hi

Sorry, i think i have updated my location.

Sydney NSW.

Sigh ... could somebody please help me find my happy pills ??? Some days seem to be better than others ...

Let me please refer you to the section of the FAQ that carries the heading MEANINGFUL Location. You may then find this section to be helpful too.

Just out of curiosity, and I hope I ask this respectfully and appreciate that it is your forum and your rules apply, but what is the big deal about the meaningful location? I understand an idea of city would be helpful, but why specifically a suburb. Some people may be concerned with privacy of information and feel a little "exposed" putting up their suburb.

Privacy? On the internet? Better run and bloody hide, quick!

Seriously, a couple of points here, and please let me deal with your second question first. We ask for a suburb and city. Not an address. just a guide as to where you might be. Now please just think about this for a minute ... please think about this logically ...

Unless and until YOU choose to reveal more about yourself, your true self, your actual identity, then nobody here .... nobody ... not even me ... has any real idea of who you are. Yes, I can access your email address, but that, too may be a disposable one, and thus your privacy is entirely in your hands.

Now, to answer the first part of your question ...

Let's return to last week's episode of exactly this same problem, where I had to ask ... thrice, IIRC ... for a new member to just read and comprehend the FAQ. That person has now complied ... and no sooner has that occurred, he has been invited to participate in a group shoot, with some some very experienced members of this forum.

Let's take a moment to fully comprehend this: some very experienced photographers have invited this person to join them on a shoot, to shoot stuff that this new member likes to shoot, in order that they can show him how he may better use his camera,his lenses, the light that surrounds him ...

And that happened to a large extent because they now know where he is. This happens time and again here. Not to mention the loan of some very expensive equipment, because you happen to know that the person lives just a couple of suburbs away.

Now let's take Sydney: it's a big town. it could take somebody up to two hours to travel from one part of town to another, and that's on a good day. I think my return trip from Leon's on Saturday evening took me about forty minutes, and that is very typical of how long it takes me to just travel from where I live, in the east, to the radio station, twice weekly, to do my radio shows. I have no major issues traveling those sorts of times, but others may. In Melbourne, traveling across town is a similar onerous task.

Let's now consider the impact of those sorts of travel requirements upon the planning of a minimeet, or a shoot, or a restaurant night out. The spread of regions within which we have planned those sorts of events has taken account of members' locations, because we had this information at hand. If most people live away from the coast, then what time of day do we need to plan an event for, given when they might be traveling, and for how long?

What about if I know that "he" has a lens that I'd like to try. I may arrange to meet him that person at some point, to just evaluate that lens in a non-threatening situation - like, not in a shop. Hell, some of the gear that our members have, and may be willing to let you play with, can't even be found in a shop.

Knowing his basic location is a real boon, and I cannot see why this represents a problem for anyone.

And as I noted above, any concerns one might have about one's privacy are just plain stupid, once you look at it logically: you always control all of the data that you emit.

gstark wrote:And that happened to a large extent because they now know where he is. This happens time and again here. Not to mention the loan of some very expensive equipment, because you happen to know that the person lives just a couple of suburbs away.
...
Let's now consider the impact of those sorts of travel requirements upon the planning of a minimeet, or a shoot, or a restaurant night out
....
What about if I know that "he" has a lens that I'd like to try. I may arrange to meet him that person at some point, to just evaluate that lens in a non-threatening situation - like, not in a shop. Hell, some of the gear that our members have, and may be willing to let you play with, can't even be found in a shop.

Knowing his basic location is a real boon, and I cannot see why this represents a problem for anyone.

with Gary on this one. I was a little apprehensive with giving my suburb at first, and living in Inner western sydney I opted to go with 'CBD, Sydney' which is not too far a stretch of the truth, but since then I have updated to 'Marrickville, Sydney'. I have found meeting members from this forum has always been beneficial, after attending a few meets I have made friends with a few members and have been thinking of organising further shooting opportunities with the members that live close by.

aim54x wrote: and living in Inner western sydney I opted to go with 'CBD, Sydney' which is not too far a stretch of the truth, but since then I have updated to 'Marrickville, Sydney'.

And that is perfectly acceptable too. For those in Sydney, what's the difference between Sydney CBD vs Surry Hills vs Redfern vs Newtown vs East Sydney vs Kings Cross vs Wooloomooloo vs The Rocks vs Paddington vs Darlinghurst vs Strawberry Hills vs Pyrmont vs Glebe.

One could easily state any of those as their location, and, first of all, nobody would challenge the accuracy, or absence of accuracy, of any of those locations. But that covers the whole length and breadth of the inner Sydney region, and any meeting point such as QVB, SOH, Eddy Avenue, Hyde Park, Town Hall ... to name but a few, is instantly recognisable, non-threatening and very public, and very easy to get to for anypne, anywhere within any of the areas that I've mentioned.

Would a Melbourne resident care much about differences in stated locations of Carlton, Melbourne CBD, Flinders St, St Kilda, or Albert Park? While I'm not a Melbourne resident, I highly doubt it. Hell, I'm from Sydney, and I could find my way to any of those locations with no problems at all.

Adelaide: King William St, Rundle Mall, North Adelaide, The Zoo, Festival Theatre, Botanical Gardens ... same deal.

If you're truly worried, use a nearby suburb, as Cameron initially did. I list Bondi but within just 1.5km from me I could say any of Bondi Junction, North Bondi, South Bondi, Bondi Beach, Bondi Heights (yes, for those who know Bondi, that now exists, and when I first became aware of that, I fell over laughing), Bellevue Hill, Dover Heights, Bronte, Waverly, Rose Bay Charing Cross, Queens Park, or Tamarama ...

Please show me where the problem lies.

I have made friends with a few members and have been thinking of organising further shooting opportunities with the members that live close by.

And please show me where this is not a benefit!

Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense.

Back on the topic Canon or NIkon, 450D or D90.

It comes as no surprise that I am a Nikon user. BUT this is not an indication that Nikon is the way to go for yourself. I am with ATJ and others in telling you to go and HOLD, FEEL, PLAY with the two cameras. CHOOSE on the one that feels more comfortable in your hand.

There is only so much that can be gleaned from reading about the specs. I have to say that we all have our biases and at the meet this weekend past I picked up Dviv's EOS 40D + grip and compared that to my own D300 + grip and the two cameras felt very different, and despite the casual glance showing similar in size and shape, closer side by side inspection reveals that the two have completely different shapes.

To me, the 450D is a smaller camera with a screen that is overly large, but the D90 is a bigger, more solid camera that feels nice in the hand. Both cameras have their faults but neither is incapable of taking good photos. As for building a kit around them, well neither brand is at a disadvantage.

Have a good look at the Canon 450D + EF-S 17-85mm USM IS and the Nikon D90 + AF-S 18-105mm VR as they are the most similar kits, and glass wise, the best compromise between price and quality. If video is important to you, than have a close look at the D90 adds this feature which is fairly usable.

When I bought my D50 I had made my mind up, on paper, to get a Canon 350D. I went down to a local Ted's, met up with a very nice sales girl there and spent the next half an hour playing with both bodies (the cameras, not the girl). My wife was with me as well and picked up and played with both cameras. At the end of it, my heart was saying the D50 but my head was saying the 350D based on specs on paper. I walked out and went for a coffee and a think, and based on my wife's good advise, went with my heart on this.

Funny thing is, I now realise that I would be taking very similar pictures with either camera and I am really happy with my decision. I don't think I picked the "better" camera, I think I picked the one that was "better" for me.

Now of course, I am debating over whether or not to upgrade to a D90. I guess this is the curse of working in IT, I inflict refresh cycles on my customers and this is karma... Funny thing is my film body is 21 years old and I never thought about replacing it (well not seriously anyway)

Enough waffle from me, go to a store and have a play and go with what "feels" better.

Ant.

Ant wrote: I don't think I picked the "better" camera, I think I picked the one that was "better" for me.

And that is the point.

go ahead and buy a Canon...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
if you wanna be a fairy.

HaHa....

if you wanna be a fairy.

Them's Fighting words...

jdear_89 wrote:HaHa....

if you wanna be a fairy.

Them's Fighting words...

Hit him with your wand!

Sweet.

I am pretty happy with the Nikon D90 Body.

Next Questions -

There are different lense kits being offered one of which is the twin lense kit 18-85mm and 85mm-200mm / 18-110mm / 18-200mm which am i best off with?

The 18-200mm kit is alot more expensive in comparison to the other two so i am thinking of going with the twin lense kit.........

Lukec wrote:Sweet.

I am pretty happy with the Nikon D90 Body.

Next Questions -

There are different lense kits being offered one of which is the twin lense kit 18-85mm and 85mm-200mm / 18-110mm / 18-200mm which am i best off with?

The 18-200mm kit is alot more expensive in comparison to the other two so i am thinking of going with the twin lense kit.........

Just some small clarification,

It is a 18-55 and 55-200 kit (that is 2 lenses)

OR

18-105

OR

18-200

As you have rightly pointed out the 18-200 is much dearer but has advantage of a 11x zoom in one lens so you don't have to swap lenses. There have been some excellent reports and then some complaining about softness in the lens.

I personally think the 18-105 would be a good start because it gives you a nice zoom range, has inbuilt VR (VR1) and then allows you to explore other lens options.

Lukec wrote:Sweet.

I am pretty happy with the Nikon D90 Body.

Next Questions -

There are different lense kits being offered one of which is the twin lense kit 18-85mm and 85mm-200mm / 18-110mm / 18-200mm which am i best off with?

The 18-200mm kit is alot more expensive in comparison to the other two so i am thinking of going with the twin lense kit.........

Alright the three kits that this camera comes with are:

-18-55 VR + 55-200 VR - a pretty good twin lens kit, Ken Rockwell and Thom Hogan both back this as a solid starters kit, and having used both lenses I would say they are a good place to start.
-18-105 VR - everything I have heard about this lens is good, it is meant to be optically as good as if not better than the 18-70 (the old standard of kit lenses) so this is not bad either
-18-200 VR - the most expensive, and arguably the most useful, personally I dislike this lens, but many other love it. Is it worth the extra, I vote no.

I would go with either the 18-105 or the 18-55+55-200 kits as they are much cheaper and provide high quality optics. (the 18-55 + 55-200 combination will give you better overall quality than a 18-200 *ducks for cover*)

Luke,

aim54x wrote:I would go with either the 18-105 or the 18-55+55-200 kits as they are much cheaper and provide high quality optics. (the 18-55 + 55-200 combination will give you better overall quality than a 18-200 *ducks for cover*)

I would concur with Cameron's suggestion.

I would also, were I you, take a few moments and re-read the whole of this thread before some grumpy old admin notices that your location is still not in compliance with the rules here, and chides you for that.

gstark wrote:I would concur with Cameron's suggestion.

i'm waiting to be attacked for bringing down the 18-200 VR though.

gstark wrote:I would also, were I you, take a few moments and re-read the whole of this thread before some grumpy old admin notices that your location is still not in compliance with the rules here, and chides you for that.

Hey there,

Firstly in regards to the D90 / Canon debate - my girlfrend recently owned the 350D, and when I bought my new camera, decided to upgrade at the same time and had her mind set on the 450D. But after going into the store and seeing the D90, decided (very smartly!) that the D90 was a better fit for her.

In regards to the lens - she decided to go with the 18-105 as a starter lens, however is now looking at switching to the 18-200. A couple of reasons are that the lens is a little fuzzy at the edges, and also it's a very plasticy lens - the mount is all plastic etc, same as the 18-55. the 18-200 on the other hand has a better feel about it.

Either way you go though - if you get interested too much - you will then start wanting (taking Nikon as an example) a Sigma 10-20 or Tokina 11-16 for wide shots, a 70-200 VR for really good fast shots, a 50 1.4, an 85 1.4, a prime 300, maybe a 1.4 & 1.7 converter..... so beware!

That's my 2 cents worth on it anyway.

In regards to the 'location' arguments that I see on almost every single new comers first posting to this site.... which (and I'm being honest here) ... appear on the surface to be rude, and petty .. but also I understand the reasons behind the request. Rather than send these as a reply to the post, use the PM system, it's a lot nicer and it doesn't ruin the atmosphere in here. I'm only saying this because I'm also a new comer to this site, and just learning, but the constant attack for someone who simply did not realise what was wanted almost turned me away, and I'm sure others have felt the same.

I realise there is a need for forum rules, however being a forum, I would have thought that the whole point of this was to invite discussions, and that these constant snipes at people really detract from this. Remember that rules can be bent without hurting anyone!

Cheers
Tom

tommyg wrote:In regards to the 'location' arguments that I see on almost every single new comers first posting to this site.... which (and I'm being honest here) ... appear on the surface to be rude, and petty .. but also I understand the reasons behind the request. Rather than send these as a reply to the post, use the PM system, it's a lot nicer and it doesn't ruin the atmosphere in here. I'm only saying this because I'm also a new comer to this site, and just learning, but the constant attack for someone who simply did not realise what was wanted almost turned me away, and I'm sure others have felt the same.

I think if you check this thread (and others are much the same), Luke was actually given the benefit of the doubt in case he "simply did not realise". Both Gary and I explained why the location was important. Gary pointed to the FAQ to remove any doubt. I don't believe anyone was rude or even petty. Again, how can we recommend a store if we don't know approximately where the person lives.

Now, Luke has been given detailed instructions on how to comply and there has even been a discussion in this very thread on the importance of the location and yet he still doesn't comply. I can fully understand Gary getting terse. How difficult is it?

In this case the wording was not 'over the top' however I have seen numerous posts in here where within a very short time there are multiple complaints and demands to update the location ... just as an example in this one alone...

10 minutes after post...

Lukec wrote:Please read the FAQ and update your profile. We can only give you meaningful information when you comply with the rules. As we have no idea of where you are located, we may as well tell you to go shopping on Nathan Road or Wilshire Blvd ... Or perhaps Trafalgar Square.

7 minutes later...

ATJ wrote:I'm surprised Gary didn't bring this up, but you don't have a meaningful location in your profile*. This means we don't know where you are (I assume you are in Australia somewhere as you mention Good Guys and Harvey Norman) but if we knew where you lived we could probably recommend a specific store close to home.

Then 30 minutes later ...

gstark wrote:Sigh ... could somebody please help me find my happy pills ??? Some days seem to be better than others ...
Let me please refer you to the section of the FAQ that carries the heading MEANINGFUL Location. You may then find this section to be helpful too.

Again, as I said ... this would have been much more easily handled by a simple PM to the orginal poster, and not make this sounds like petulance.

tommyg wrote:In this case the wording was not 'over the top' however I have seen numerous posts in here where within a very short time there are multiple complaints and demands to update the location ... just as an example in this one alone...

Of course, if you take things out of context you can make them say pretty much anything you like. Go back an reread those things you quoted within the context and you will get a completely different story.

Gary's first post didn't initially have any comments about location, which was why I mentioned it in a friendly manner. By the time I posted my post, Gary had edited his with the location information so I updated mine to indicate as such. Why did you choose to ignore that?

Gary's second post was AFTER Luke had posted saying he'd updated his location and it did not follow the guidelines as spelled out (in some detail) in the FAQ. Again, why did you choose to ignore that important part of the story?

Oh, and if you think PMs work so well, why aren't you using them and instead airing this publicly?

Tommy,

A couple of points.

First of all, please do me a favour. Press the "reply" button. Then look at the screen. Please tell me what is says in the pink section, right in front of your very own eyes.

The screen in front of you is there to provide you with information. And information is provided there, about as in your face as it can be.

Let's move on to the points that you have made ...

tommyg wrote:In regards to the 'location' arguments that I see on almost every single new comers first posting to this site

At which point you're saying, and accepting, that you have observed these other posts that I've made. That is good, but let's take that to the next step. If you have seen these, then is it reasonable to presume that others, too, may have seen them? Other new members?

If we accept that other new members would have seen these, as you have, then what is it about those other members that makes them think that this request to include their location in their profile would not apply to them?

Do they believe that those rules, so frequently stated, would for some strange reason apply to everyone else, but not to them?

Rather than send these as a reply to the post, use the PM system,

Been there.

Done that.

Got the t-shirt. Got a whole wardrobe-full of 'em, actually. Didn't work: I still had to post messages in threads.

Next, please!

but the constant attack for someone who simply did not realise what was wanted almost turned me away, and I'm sure others have felt the same.

In the first instance, it's never an attack. When they ignore the first request, then I start to become a bit shirty. In this case we're up at least four requests.

How many such requests should there be, when (a) it's already on the bloody page, right in front of their noses; (b) it's on the front page, where they most likely had their very first experience of this site; (c) it's in the FAQ, and (d) as you have so astutely noted, there's a more than ample sufficiency of other threads that expound the same message.

I realise there is a need for forum rules, however being a forum, I would have thought that the whole point of this was to invite discussions, and that these constant snipes at people really detract from this. Remember that rules can be bent without hurting anyone!

And I believe that we are more than reasonable with the way that these are applied.

The rules are clear, as are the reasons behind them. The OP has had ample time to amend his profile, yet he has not done so. At which point do I ban him?

It really doesn't take a lot of effort to read and comprehend what is being said, does it?

Let's please now keep this thread on-topic.

(the 18-55 + 55-200 combination will give you better overall quality than a 18-200 *ducks for cover*)

as you know Cameron, I own the 18-200 and have a love hate relationship with it and probably will never get rid of it, i agree, there is no doubt the 18-55 + 55-200 combo would give better overall quality, however the big drawcard for me, and potentially for other dslr newbies is the convenience factor, less crap to carry around, less time to pop out a shot and at the end of the day if you use the lens in its sweet spot (s) the quality is quite good.

As with the nikon vs canon issue, it comes down to the person, their personal requirements, their shooting style (maybe the style and subjects they shoot with might be better suited to the 18-55 + 55-200 combo)

with that waffle done, I can definitely recommend the 18-200, as a jack of all trades it has probably spent the most time on my body (during the initial periods anyway) and without a doubt got me some excellent shots. As a travel lens, I reckon you would be hard to beat it....when your out walking the rainforest in FNQ and need to capture a landscape or nail the croc, the 18-200 is the one I would choose. Just be aware of the limitations and disadvantages of it (as you would with most lens) - lens creep, softness at the extremes and certain apertures, dust ingress are just a couple that come to mind.

The build quality on the 18-200 is pretty good i reckon, for a modern lens anyway, given the extreme zoom it is still a pretty tight setup and I have had no issues with mine even with some more than a few bumps against tree's etc....

I have to say that DSRLUsers is one of the best behaved forums with which I have been involved, ever! I have been members of forums in some shape or form since the early 90s so this is a big call. While people might feel that Gary can be a little heavy handed, grumpy and a pedant, I think this is what is needed in forums to keep them running well. There's nothing worse than a forum that allows everyone to run amuck and so enforcement of the rules, no matter how trivial it may seem, is an important part of keeping a forum civil.

For those in Sydney, what's the difference between Sydney CBD vs Surry Hills vs Redfern vs Newtown vs East Sydney vs Kings Cross vs Wooloomooloo vs The Rocks vs Paddington vs Darlinghurst vs Strawberry Hills vs Pyrmont vs Glebe

hmmm...let me think about that...a crapload of money

biggerry wrote:

For those in Sydney, what's the difference between Sydney CBD vs Surry Hills vs Redfern vs Newtown vs East Sydney vs Kings Cross vs Wooloomooloo vs The Rocks vs Paddington vs Darlinghurst vs Strawberry Hills vs Pyrmont vs Glebe

hmmm...let me think about that...a crapload of money

 ROFL!!!!!

Sorry but I must point out that this is getting VERY

The OP has decided on a Nikon D90 (lucky bugger) and is wondering which lens kit to get
-18-55 VR + 55-200 VR
-18-105 VR
-18-200 VR

On the lens ... I would personally go the 18-200 over the twin lens kit for a number of reasons;

• Don't need to switch lens all the time
• Better build quality
• Check out Ken Rockwell - picks the 18-200 as THE lens for Nikon DX cameras
• twin lens have plastic mounts
• It's sharp through pretty well the whole range except at 200

biggerry wrote:

For those in Sydney, what's the difference between Sydney CBD vs Surry Hills vs Redfern vs Newtown vs East Sydney vs Kings Cross vs Wooloomooloo vs The Rocks vs Paddington vs Darlinghurst vs Strawberry Hills vs Pyrmont vs Glebe

hmmm...let me think about that...a crapload of money

I can direct you to some prime park benches in Woolarah, or if you prefer, with a waterview by the beach.

tommyg wrote:On the lens ... I would personally go the 18-200 over the twin lens kit for a number of reasons;

• Don't need to switch lens all the time
• Better build quality
• Check out Ken Rockwell - picks the 18-200 as THE lens for Nikon DX cameras
• twin lens have plastic mounts
• It's sharp through pretty well the whole range except at 200

Ken Rockwell....I dont want to start on him. The lightness of the twin lenses means it a plastic mount is a non issue, can I raise the question of HOW MUCH better is the build? Good enough to fore go better all round image quality AND pay a big price difference?

As you noted there is the chance you will get bitten by the photography bug and yearn for better glass, so also weigh up the idea of banking the difference for better glass later.

The 18-200 does have the all-in-one nature that is great for a beginner I have to agree.

Here's probably a more reliable review: AFS-Nikkor 18-200 mm f/3.5-5.6 VR G ED DX

ATJ wrote:While people might feel that Gary can be a little heavy handed, grumpy and a pedant...

Even Gary doesn't refer to himself that nicely.

some prime park benches in Woolarah, or if you prefer, with a waterview by the beach

probably still could not afford the parking

great for a beginner I have to agree

not only the beginner, the advantages of only taking 1 lens on a long hike or when on a holiday should not be underestimated, I have done a few walks where I would have loved to take the macro and a long lens but is just not feasible, the 18-200 makes an excellent comprise in these situations. As mentioned, it is quite pricey, however the upside (correct me here if I am wrong) is that it is and has been holding its resale value fairly well.

biggerry wrote:the advantages of only taking 1 lens on a long hike or when on a holiday should not be underestimated

This is where I miss my D40x + 18-135mm! These days I just settle for my 17-50mm f/2.8

biggerry wrote:

some prime park benches in Woolarah, or if you prefer, with a waterview by the beach

probably still could not afford the parking

And bus fares are about to go up too.

not only the beginner, the advantages of only taking 1 lens on a long hike or when on a holiday should not be underestimated,

That is very true, but I think, for the cost saving with the twin lens kit, that would be the better buy. Keep the extra $$$$ in your pocket, and you've (a) spent less if you end up deciding that you don't like photography, or (b) have more money in your kick to invest in good glass if the reverse occurs.

Thanks for the reply all.

I am fairly new to DSLR photography and bought the D90 with twin lens kit. The problem I had is when I went to Toronga Zoo I had to constantly change lenses to get the best shots. I also had to sacrifice some shots because I did not have correct range to capture spontaneous moments. This pissed me off enough to cough up the ridiculous price for the 18-200mm. No regrets - this lens is very nice for me (prosumer/enthusiast) for my general needs.

My mate recently had his wedding and both photographers had D300's with 18-200mm and SB800 speedlight. The pictures looked awesome - and very sharp.

The 18-200 distorts straight lines in pictures eg. architecture / tall buildings. This can be correct in photoshop.

MatthewRoberts wrote:the 18-200mm. No regrets - this lens is very nice for me (prosumer/enthusiast) for my general needs.

And that is the key - you are happy.

My mate recently had his wedding and both photographers had D300's with 18-200mm and SB800 speedlight. The pictures looked awesome - and very sharp.

As a hobbyist - I have shot at a couple of friends weddings, and rapidly upgraded to a f2.8 28-70 Nikkor as the slow 18-200 isn't that great (I have one too).

I'd be a bit concerned if my wedding shooter was using just a D300 and 18-200..... due to creative limitations that this lens has.

Now, the 28-70 lives on my D200.... and the 18-200 doesn't get any use in favor of my trinity - Sigma 10-20, Nikkor 28-70 f2.8 and Nikkor 80-400VR.

But this is all my opinion, and if your mate is happy.... that's great.

Hi All

Many thanks for the advice.

I now have a D90 with a twin lense kit and am pretty blown away with it.

Ifeel this maybe another addictive expensive hobby coming on.

Cheers
Luke

You're not kidding on the expensive side!

My 'better' half bought the D90 a couple of months ago... at the time she was happy with her old Canon 350D twin lens kit, and only decided to upgrade as I was set on getting my first ever Digital camera - I chose the D700 .

So, 2 months later ... $6,000 so far between us, and were still 4-5 lenses short of where we want to be in 6 months!

I agree about the start of the expensive hobby (I'm the better half referred to in the last post)..... a year ago I couldn't fathom how anyone could spend thousands of dollars on lenses, and now I spend half the weekend in camera shops drooling over lenses that we will get one of these days!!!

tommyg wrote:My 'better' half bought the D90 a couple of months ago...

Hey Tom, less of the quote marks around 'better'

Cathy

Oi - no domestics on the forum.

Unless you want Gary to come in and mediate, which could get untidy

Both are good, very good. ( but go the Nikon )

Hi all, another noob here, really enjoy the posts and all the information on this site!
I find myself in the same situation, purchasing first DSLR, I have a Nikon F50(old school) and would like to purchase a D90, it feels right, but would like to ensure that the stock lenses (twin,18-105,18-200)are capable of taking acceptable close ups for jewellery and the like, any advice would be much appreciated!

Cheers Rob

jaff wrote:Hi all, another noob here, really enjoy the posts and all the information on this site!
I find myself in the same situation, purchasing first DSLR, I have a Nikon F50(old school) and would like to purchase a D90, it feels right, but would like to ensure that the stock lenses (twin,18-105,18-200)are capable of taking acceptable close ups for jewellery and the like, any advice would be much appreciated!

Cheers Rob

Welcome Rob...the answer to your question depends on what is acceptable??? Do you have any of your lenses from the F50?? What do you currently use to shoot close ups with?

The 55-200VR is alright, but not a true macro so you will not get anywhere near life size reproduction, nor the level of detail that you would get from a macro lens, the 18-105 and the 18-200 are much the same case although the 105 does not have as much magnification and the 18-200 is a bit weaker at the 200mm end. In short, any of them will be acceptable for some...but for most of us on the forum here probably not..

Thanks for the swift reply Cameron, I have a AF 35-80 on the F50, but this is probably not suitable either, have outsourced pieces to be photographed previously. Perhaps I need to think of a specialised macro lens, to get pro looking results(well as much as a noob can). Has anyone got any close ups using any of these stock lenses(twin, 18-105, 18-200) would love to see if they might be acceptable.

Cheers Rob